OMG Life Autographer Quick Review

Software

Once you've been out with the Autographer shooting away quietly to itself, you'll find out that you have to handle hundreds, perhaps thousands of images. And in truth, most of those images on their own will be rather dull. Luckily the camera comes with pretty decent software to help manage your files. You can use either a desktop app (that you can install from the camera itself), or a free smartphone app - overall the two have an admirably consistent look and feel, and pretty intuitive interfaces.

The apps allow you to delete images, mark them as favourites and attach keyword tags, or share them via Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or Autographer's own site. Perhaps most interestingly, it allows you to assemble your images into movies or animated gifs, with an impressively intuitive interface and the option of multiple framerates.

Desktop app

When you first install and run the desktop app, it takes you through a basic setup process, inviting you to sign up Autographer's own web portal (where you can share your stills and movies). It then prompts you to import your images (with the option of deleting them from the device itself). Once this is done, you can start browsing.

The app opens up in thumbnail (or 'Stream') view, and first you select which day's images you want to view. You'll then get a thumbnail view, and a somewhat basic GPS track of where you've been. The lower right panel shows all of the data from the camera's environmental sensors for the selected thumbnail. Images that form part of a manually-activated sequence are marked with yellow icons on the top corner of the thumbnail. Double-clicking a thumbnail enters an enlarged image view, called 'Cinema'.

Here you can see an enlarged view of your selected image, alongside the same metadata on the right. You can browse through images using the bottom thumbnail strip, and even run through them as an animation by clicking the 'play' button on the selected thumbnail (hence 'Cinema' view). This replays an unexpectedly compelling chronicle of your day, although it may not necessarily interest anyone else.

If you select multiple thumbnails in the opening view, then click on the 'Create' button (overlapping squares at the lower right of the window), you can build an animation. You can remove frames, and select your movie size and framerate (from 1/4 to 12 fps). You can also add music from your collection - just beware of copyright restrictions.

Smartphone app

The smartphone app behaves broadly similarly to the desktop version, but with a slightly reduced range of features. For example the video editor is less sophisticated, and only outputs movies at 640x480 resolution.

Autographer's app is currently only available for iOS users, but Android support is supposedly on its way. It connects to the camera using Bluetooth.

After a simple initial pairing process, the app will recognise your Autographer automatically from then on. Press the big yellow button to connect.

The opening thumbnail view is a bit different than the desktop app - it's divided into date and 'Chapters'.

Tap on a chapter to enter your main 'Stream'. Here you'll see all of your images - those which form part of a manual sequence have a blue square on the top corner.

Tapping a thumbnail pulls up a larger view, and the location the image was shot. You can't see it in this screenshot, but the GPS mapping in the mobile app is far more detailed than the desktop app.

The blue square in the top corner indicates that this image was part of a manually-activated sequence; images marked as Favourites get a yellow square.

Tap the image and it flips over to show a metadata panel, with the camera's sensor data. A lot of this is presented in an obscure fashion, with only the GPS coordinates and temperature obviously interpretable.

In Stream view, tap a thumbnail for a second or two to select it. You can then add frames to your selection, in preparation for generating a movie. Simply tap thumbnails to add them to the selection, tap again to remove. Multiple frames can be added by dragging your finger across the screen.

To create a movie, tap the 'share' button (lower left) then 'create'. You'll then see this screen, on which you can select your output settings, and add music from your library. Press 'Save' and the movie will be saved to your camera roll.

It may seem odd for the Autographer to use Bluetooth rather than Wi-Fi, which has higher bandwidth and is used by most other cameras. But in practice it works OK - the camera initially only transfers small thumbnails to your phone, so the amount of data being moved is rather small. The phone app also only generates VGA movies, with a maximum of 100 frames, so they're not huge either. One big advantage of using Bluetooth is that you can easily browse through images and create movies without disrupting your phone's existing Wi-Fi connection (for example to your home network).

So deciding where you are going with the camera, what you are aiming it at and what situations you are getting in is not an input?Is it just the act of physically pressing the shutter that makes a photograph? I would say that there is more artistic input in taking a conscious decision in using surveillance camera footage and organising that footage in a way that it tells a story to , say, taking pictures of cats and obsessing over their sharpness and colour , perhaps spending hours comparing them online with other pictures of cats taken with other cameras ;)

The act of composing a scene and pressing the shutter release button at the right moment is MAKING a photograph. Walking around hoping the camera shoots at the right moment is being a transportation device for a snapshot machine. Maybe I'm l'd old school, but I still believe the "decisive moment" should be up to the photographer to capture. Otherwise it's just luck. The old "Put enough monkeys in a room with a typewriter they'll produce Shakespeare" scenario.

That is truly a situation where one could say "dude, your camera sure takes nice pictures!".

As far as dissecting cat pictures (pun intended), well, every photographer needs to find his niche. If it weren't for those folks camera discussion forums would be lonely places (and probably much more pleasant). :)

Whether you love or hate this (or Glass), it's coming and you may as well get used to it. This reminds me of early digicams - large, clunky, and with poor image quality. The next gen., or several after, will be cheap, very small, and take great pictures.

As for privacy - what privacy? (if in public). I get photographed by CCTV a zillion times a day - so if people on the street do it, who cares. What I DO have issue with is if someone did this without my knowledge in my home.

What will be even more interesting is when micro-UAVs the size of an insect are (eventually) produced. That's perhaps more a worry than what people can stick around their necks. And that too is coming - perhaps sooner than people realise.

As for this device - way too expensive, way too big. But as I said, this is early days. I'd wear one because I'd like to make a diary and I have no time to write one each day, but I'd only be interested if it was not intrusive (which this thing is).

Trollshave: it is you who are taking my opinions as "more than that". While I am partly stating "my opinion", I'm mostly just stating what is inevitable - personal always-on camera recording is here to stay, whether you (or I) like it or not. Now, unless you are so sure that there is a chance to legislate in every country in the world and remove the right to take street photography, then I'd say the chances of stopping this are close to zero. Don't forget - you'd have to legislate against street photography, because why should someone holding a camera have more rights than someone wearing a camera? And how will you define holding/wearing once the cameras become really small?

As for my *opinion*. I'm neither for nor against. I can see useful things and also misuse with this tool. My main concern is what happens in private. In the street (i.e.: in public) I still say "who cares".

I think as soon as Google Glass comes out - everyone should aim themselves with high power laser pointers. These can damage DSLR sensors, so surely they can damage Google Glass as well, right?#BTW: I have no idea why they heck you compare CCTV to Street Photography, and that to Google Glass or any other spy camera. All of these are completely different things.

The sense of this thing aside (there are smaller cell phones with cameras around) - this thing disqualifies itself by its absolutely abyssmal image quality.

5MP is low to begin with, and the real resolution is far worse (I see no features less than 3-4 pixels in size, so those images could be reduces to at most something like 1280*720 if you want a sharp image).

The tiny sensor with a slow lens makes it almost useless except outside at sunshine... and there you got the crap flare resistance, and with such a wide fisheye the sun will be in the frame quite often.

But the last straw, and the worst part, is the price. If it was $50 from a chinese direct distributor, fine. but 400 pound? thats ridiculous!

Wouldn't the device work better if part of a hat or eyeglasses? Hanging on a strap, it is bound to shift or dangle about, aligning with the person's line of sight only accidentally. The tortoise (or is that a Tory MP?) in the stop-action video gets cut off.

No image stabilization even at that price? I mean considering its usage, IMO some sort of image stabilization is a must.I do like the concept. I've been thinking of wearing one of those Sony Cybershot TX cameras in a similar fashion. :D

Next up, a medicine cabinet which, at certain times of the day, will lob pills at you if you're standing in front of it with mouth open and then open its door. What? You don't get it? Why have to actually reach in, take out and open a bottle or two, then take your pills manually, when technology can do 98 percent of the work?

Eventually, the Chow Plower — speed and efficiency preparing and feeding you a meal, beyond anything you ever imagined. You won't even have to lift a fork!

Seriously, this OMG Life "innovation" comes across as an odd, redundant contrivance in this era when most of the population feels naked without a smartphone-with-camera, and all-weather mini cams are reasonably priced and plentiful.

The concept is absurb for a forum full of photographers. But this is no joke. There is an emgerging flow of thought brought along by Google Glass called Timeline. In the timeline, the present is most important. Then unimportant things in the past slowly fade away. That's how human memory works. Our eyes observe everything constantly, then retain only remarkable things in the past.

A person can just wear this device, or Google Glass, everyday and it silently takes pictures whenever something new or interesting happens. These pictures are only stored for a short period of time. When something interesting happens, the person, or friends can later revisit the photos and make them sticky, meaning to save them permanently. The photos that are not looked at are eventually deleted.

You'd be surprised how many interesting things in life are missed because they didn't seem photo worthy at the time. Think about the interesting moments of your life and whether you have pictures for them.

Let me name a few of those moments that you could've missed:. When you first met your spouse. When your kid ran to greet you with open arms. When the 8rd grade friend punched you in the face. When you stood in a podium to receive your diploma, and looked over the crowd seeing your parents clapping for you.

It's great for photographers that inject art into their photography. Including landscape, portraiture, photojournalism (capturing a story rather than a moment). Because they will be further differentiated from the masses.

And this type of device, plus phones, glass etc. is great for photography where content wins and artistry comes second. E.g. The kind of photo we see in news these days captured from security cameras. Because nobody else and nothing better was there.

It's great for photographers that inject art into their photography. Including landscape, portraiture, photojournalism (capturing a story rather than a moment). Because they will be further differentiated from the masses.

And this type of device, plus phones, glass etc. is great for photography where content wins and artistry comes second. E.g. The kind of photo we see in news these days captured from security cameras. Because nobody else and nothing better was there.

It's great for photographers that inject art into their photography. Including landscape, portraiture, photojournalism (capturing a story rather than a moment). Because they will be further differentiated from the masses.

And this type of device, plus phones, glass etc. is great for photography where content wins and artistry comes second. E.g. The kind of photo we see in news these days captured from security cameras. Because nobody else and nothing better was there.

Hoosh, can you repeat that again, please?Today something important happened and I didn't have a camera with me to register it: I got into a bus and the driver actually looked at me. What makes this memorable is that they never look at anyone. I wish I had this OMG thingie with me to capture that unique occasion. (The moment I bought my cigarettes was also memorable, but admittedly not so much as that bus driver looking at me.)It is very important to capture all significant moments in our everyday lives. And there are so many.

Sorry for the repeats. I got an error every time I hit post, then went back and tried again twice because it said to try again later. Surprised to see it worked actually and now annoyed at looking like a noob. Login system seems to have changed to amazon web services which has problems with china, which is where I live.

Better a neck strap than a camera fallen to the ground or getting impregnated with lint in a pocket. Is today's fashion to balance one on the head or to carry it in a rolled-up shirt sleeve? Of course, most don't carry a camera at all, but only a phone.

It's a car camera for your body. Maybe good for police, etc., but really needs smarter software for searching the images. Gordon Bell at Microsoft was pushing this concept for quite a long time, and had some interesting stuff in MyLifeBits, etc. Links at his website: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gbell/

$610 is dirt cheap if it provides you with proof of having been brutalized by police. This just happened a week or so ago, and the police said that the people had no right to complain to the press. A picture is worth a thousand words.

The research showed that these patients would forget significant amounts of their lives even in a few short days. With the cameras, they remembered as much as 85% when presented with photos of their day.

This technology has amazing potential for people who suffer from memory loss.

Do the patients really "remember" what is in the photos? Or do they simply see images images and ponder, "Oh, that looks nice," and 5 minutes later not remember seeing the pictures or what they were about?

As my dad has Alzheimer's I can say that in the very early stages it might be helpful but at the stage he is now he lacks comprehension to switch his TV on (he used to an aerospace engineer who worked on building Concord and Airbus) or to follow a newspaper - so a very small window of opportunity sadly, what I do for him is convert all his old slides to digital so I can show him things from 40 or 50 years ago in my youth and those he often does remember.

Yet another scheme to part the gullible from their money with the illusion of effortless recording of great images of great moments. There was the Brownie box camera, there was 110, and Polaroid and countless cheap plastic cameras. While with concentrated effort a skilled photographer could produce worthwhile images even from these, the main result was hundreds of millions of fading, worthless snapshots. This new toy promises to increase that by an order of magnitude...or two.

The making of images worth a second look almost always requires effort and concentration and disciplined skill. This new toy promises the opposite. But it may well sell.

As I suspected, the low light performance is not great ... and especially as a party camera ... that's important. Perhaps there should be an Infrared version with a IR flash that is invisible to our eyes. I use to shoot with an IR flash ... pretty neat getting full (IR) exposure in near darkness.

I'd like to have one of these, smaller so I could hide it in my tie clip, to go with my Hai Karate aftershave. But if that's not to be, I still want one for the dog. He's not in a league with Garry Winogrand...yet.

For those of us who have missed being in the moment while we take photos for a big part of our lives, this could be great for certain social and sport functions. Of course there is software to removed distortion. Like anything ... there is a time and a place ...

Starting October 1st, Getty Images will no longer accept images in which the models have been Photoshopped to "look thinner or larger." The change was made due to a French law that requires disclosure of such images.

A court ruling our of Newton, Massachusetts has set an important legal precedent for drone pilots: federal drone laws will now trump local drone regulations in situations where the two are in conflict.

macOS High Sierra came out today, but if you use a Wacom tablet you need to wait a few weeks before you upgrade. According to Wacom, they won't have a compatible driver ready for you until "late October."

Vitec, the company that owns popular accessory maker Manfrotto, has just acquired JOBY and Lowepro for a cool $10.3 million in cash. The acquisition adds JOBY and Lowepro to Vitec's already sizable collection of camera gear brands.

A veteran photojournalist, Rick Wilking secured a spot in the path of totality for the August solar eclipse. While things didn't quite pan out as predicted, an unexpected subject in the sky and a quick reaction made for a once-in-a-lifetime shot.